The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1887-05-26

Congress to regulate trade. 1hls,
however, does not affect the question
of license.
Well, .then,-if that be so, suppose
his goods be infected with smallpox,
his cattle with pleuro-pneumonia, or
he have rattlesnakes Il e they are
raised for sale) e<mad dogs, must
they all come? Not soS(They may
be prohibited by a tax~or by penalties
or in any other way that North Caro-
lima pleases. Not, however, under
any idea of regulating trade, but by
police power of self-protection. Even
the late decision of the United States
| Supreme Court admits that power.
| That decision is this
A merchant Of writing paper and
other stationery in Ohio sent his agent
to Tennessee to sell his goods by
sample, which he had the constitu-
tionai right to dos And, Tennessee
imposed a penalty on him for doing it.
Now there was nothing harmful in
the goods, nothing to call forth the
police power, of self,pretection, but it
was the clear attempt BY Tennessee to
regulate trade and to burden the
rights of the citizen. The court de-
cided that Tennessee could not do
that ; but, in the same discussion the
court admits that if the goods had
been harmful, then under the police
power, they might have been excluded;
or if they had been suspected, then
under the same power and inspection
laws they might have been inspected
and of; course burdened. with the
charges of inspecting, and for all
police regulations. The language Of
the court is
at is also an established principle,
as already indicated, that the only
way in which commerce between the
States can be legitimately affected by
State laws is when, by virtue of the
police power and its jurisdiction rel
persons and property within its limits,
a State provides for the security of
the lives, limbs, health and comfort
of persons and the protection of prop
erty. + + The passage of in
spection laws to ecu the due quality
and measure of produce and commod-
tiles the passage of laws to regulate
or restrict the sale of articles deemed
injurious to the health or morals of
the community" &c.
Now if I a show that the North
Carolina statute is in the exercise of
it's police power for protecting against
fraudulent, or injurious, or spurious
goods, and as the nature of inspection
laws to determine their quality, and
that whatever effect it has on trade is
only incidental, then so far from the
Tennessee decision being against our
statute, it clearly sustains it.
N The North Carolina statute in re-
gard to the sale of commercial fertili-
zers is a part of the statute for the
establishment of the agricultural de-
partment for the improvement of agri-
culture. One of the most important
matters connected with agriculture is
the use of commercial fertilizers.
They may be very good or utterly
worthless. And it is impossible to
tell their quality except by expensive
scientific investigation. It is made
the duty of the Board of Agriculture
to establish a laboratory and to employ
learned chemists to *analyze every
brand of fertilizers offered for sale in
the State by whomsoever offered, and
to see that every parcel. is truthfnlly
branded, and if not so branded to seize
the same as Spurious" and sell the
same under proper proceedings for
the benefit of the agricultural depart
ment. If, however, it be truthfully
branded it may be sold without tax
from city, county or State. All this
must be at heavy expense, andato
cover it there must. be a tax, andsto
guard against imposition theremnst
be a license. See code.
In the Tennessee case the goods
were harmless; they could not be other
wise. There was no inspection and no
need of any, noexpense and no charge.
It was a simple tax on trade tor the
sake Of revenue.
Our statute is simply to prevent fraud
and imposition onour most important
and defenceless industry, and to pay the
expenses of the department established
for its protection. "A purely police
power for self protection.
/, The North Carolina statute was be
foro tho North Caroline S,lnrnroo